Science Left Behind Excerpt In New Scientist
    By Hank Campbell | January 31st 2013 12:30 PM | 7 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
    About Hank

    I'm the founder of Science 2.0®.

    A wise man once said Darwin had the greatest idea anyone ever had. Others may prefer Newton or Archimedes...

    View Hank's Profile
    If you subscribe to New Scientist, you can read an excerpt of "Science Left Behind" by their editors, drawn from the book and dealing with some of the more nonsensical ways progressives get catered to by politicians who are happy to check science, reason and data at the door if it will get out some votes; in this case by replacing plastic utensils in the Congressional cafeteria with corn-based ones that melted in soup and couldn't cut anything.

    This was supposed to appeal to the environmental movement - and it certainly did - but it did nothing at all to help the environment. Its cancellation did, however, lead to an all-out assault on the California Republican who took the advice of his Democrat predecessor and undid the program when Republicans got control of the House again early in 2011.  In the last election, due to redistricting and an expensive public relations campaign noting he was 'wrong for California', Rep. Dan Lungren was defeated.

    But they were basically correct in their campaign ads. Science and reason are 'wrong for California', at least to 66% of the state, because it often is in defiance of their world view. 

    Lefty nonsense: When progressives wage war on reason - New Scientist


    Seems you've done well with the book, Hank. Congratulations.

    Thanks, the publisher is happy but unless you are that Harry Potter lady, writing does not make lot of money.  :)
    Terrific, Hank! Congratulations! I have started but not finished reading the book. But I remember you told me this story. A good illustration of your point, me thinks. :-)
    Bente Lilja Bye is the author of Lilja - A bouquet of stories about the Earth
    The funny difference between print and online audiences:

    I got a PDF of the excerpt from New Scientist and it had the moderate title shown below:

    But the digital version went for something probably more likely to appeal to the digital crowd:

    One of the anecdotes in Science Left Behind was our meeting with the publisher and them asking, 'what is the claim political opportunists will use against you" and we replied 'false equivalence'.

    False equivalence is, of course, not logic - it is a faux logical fallacy that was invented by progressive journalists to show why it was right to go after George Bush's military service but not John Kerry's.

    Comments on the article trot out this dead carcass again, insisting the progressive war on food, energy and medicine are false equivalence compared to...wait for it...creationism.  Yes, creationism is the big problem America faces, not children being crippled or dying from a weird war on medicine - a few crackpot school districts are the problem, despite the fact that America has led the world in Nobel prizes while being far more religious - sorry, "creationist", those are the same to partisan cranks - than it is today.

    Thus, we get the perfect bit of false equivalence you can imagine: why it is right when the left is anti-science but wrong when the right does it.

    Gerhard Adam
    It's not just creationism.  Let's remember the Terry Schiavo incident, where we had a Republican congress and President prepared to overrule a State court decision [so much for state's rights] simply because they disagreed with it.  They had a special session of congress to pass a law to interfere in a state court decision.  There were former doctors in Congress that claimed to have made diagnoses from videotape.

    In short, they violated virtually every scientific and political rights standard and in an unabashedly political interfering way that was far more dangerous and telling that even things the activists are accused of.

    I get that there are anti-science types on both sides of the aisle, but let's not overlook the fact that it involves far more than the relatively innocuous topic of creationism.  Everything ranging from abortion to the "right to die" have been interfered with precisely because of these fringe anti-scientific beliefs.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Sure, yet those are all well-covered.  It's been open season on the right for a decade.  Saying 'well, the right is bad too' isn't anything new, the outright denial it is anyone but the people on the right is why I wrote the book.